3 The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization nor of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the World Health Organization nor of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations nor of their affiliated organization(s). The World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations do not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and shall not be liable for any damage incurred as a result of its use. All rights reserved. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate the material contained in this publication whether for sale or for non-commercial distribution - should be addressed to the Chief, Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch, Information Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy, or by to or to Publications, Marketing and Dissemination, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, or by facsimile to , or by to FAO/ WHO ii -

4 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS...iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...v FOREWORD... vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...ix 1 INTRODUCTION Background Terminology used in the report Overview of microbiological risk management Food safety management in practice Using MRA in the selection/evaluation of intermediate targets Recent activities at the international level Overview of expert meeting Objective of report USE OF MRA OUTPUTS IN THE MRM PROCESS Tools for informing the MRM process Microbiological risk assessment (MRA) Factors influencing the type of risk assessment undertaken Considerations regarding the use of MRA Examples of MRA outputs for use in MRM Epidemiology-based tools Source attribution Analysis of outbreak investigations Analytical epidemiological studies Microbial subtyping Economic analysis (Cost-benefit analysis) ESTABLISHMENT / USE OF METRICS IN THE MRM PROCESS Introduction Public health status and public health goals Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP) Using MRA to establish and evaluate metrics iii -

5 3.4.1 Using MRA in the selection/evaluation of intermediate targets Direct use of MRA in the selection / evaluation of control measures Monitoring to verify effectiveness of control measures Using MRA in verifying compliance CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions Recommendations ONGOING AND FUTURE WORK ANNEXES ANNEX I APPENDIX VII FROM THE REPORT OF THE 37TH SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD HYGIENE (ALINORM 05/28/13) ANNEX II FAO/WHO CONCEPT NOTE FOR FUTURE WORK ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRACTICAL RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES BASED ON MICROBIOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OUTPUTS ANNEX III MEMBERS OF THE PRE-MEETING WORKING GROUPS ANNEX IV KEY FINDINGS OF THE PATHOGEN-COMMODITY CASE STUDIES ANNEX V LIST OF MEETING PARTICIPANTS ANNEX VI APPENDIX III FROM THE REPORT OF THE 37TH SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD HYGIENE (ALINORM 05/28/13) iv -

6 Acknowledgements The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) would like to express their appreciation to all those who contributed and continue to contribute to the process of developing practical guidelines on the use of microbiological risk assessment outputs to develop practical risk management strategies. This includes those who prepared the background papers, provided information on the situation in their countries, completed questionnaires, participated in preparatory meetings, teleconferences and the expert meeting and, finally, in the preparation of the report of the expert meeting. Finally, FAO and WHO extend their sincere appreciation and gratitude to Dr. Paul Teufel and his staff at the Federal Research Centre for Nutrition and Food, Kiel, Germany, for their assistance in organising and implementing the expert meeting, and to the German Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection for their financial support. - v -

7

8 Foreword The Codex Alimentarius Commission adopted Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Assessment in Since then numerous microbiological risk assessments have been undertaken at both national and international levels and the methodology and tools for this type of risk assessment continue to evolve and advance. The establishment of a clear understanding of how best to use this tool in elaborating risk management decisions has been more difficult. In 2002 FAO and WHO convened an expert meeting to develop principles and guidelines for incorporating microbiological risk assessment in the development of food safety standards, guidelines and related texts. The output of this meeting was enlightening in many respects, particularly in providing guidance on preliminary risk management activities. However, it was less successful in providing guidance on how to use MRA to establish specific numerical targets or standards. Since then Codex Alimentarius has adopted definitions of food safety targets that could be established by means of risk assessment i.e. food safety objective, performance objective. Although agreeing on definitions, Codex at that time was unable to provide guidance as to how these targets could, in practice, be determined and achieved. As the same time FAO, WHO and Codex observed the difficulties within the Codex system of utilising the MRA s developed by FAO and WHO at the request of Codex. In 2004 FAO and WHO agreed that more work was needed in this area and this was endorsed by the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene. FAO and WHO then initiated a programme of activities to address this, with the ultimate objective of providing guidance in the application of MRA to establish specific numerical targets or standards. These activities have included the establishment of a number of working groups to look at the issues and the results of microbiological risk assessment to develop food control measures, with particular emphasis on the establishment of targets or metrics and their application. The outputs of these working groups and other relevant documentation were then considered and discussed by an expert meeting convened in Kiel, Germany on 3 7 April This report aims to summarise the recent international discussions and their outcomes and provide an overview as to the current status in terms of the application of MRA in food safety management. Although good progress has been made in recent years, many challenges remain. - vii -

9

10 Executive Summary In recent years risk-based approaches, based on the best available scientific information, have been recognized as a means of enhancing the ability of food safety risk management to meet its primary goal of protecting public health, as well as ensuring access to an adequate food supply and facilitating trade. Such an approach implies that actions, regulations, guidelines, and standards are constructed and formulated according to specific knowledge of risks to life and health. The practical aspects of developing and implementing of a riskbased standards introduce new challenges. Microbiological risk assessment (MRA) is now well recognized as a risk management decision-support tool. When properly designed, a MRA is an objective, systematic evaluation of relevant scientific knowledge to help the risk manager make an informed decision about how to reduce the risk posed by a food safety issue. It is a particularly useful tool in enabling the risk manager to consider and compare risk management options and derive food safety control measures. Together with other tools, for example epidemiology based tools (e.g. source attribution) and economic analysis, it can provide a sound scientific foundation for risk-based management systems and control measures. This report describes some of the recent international activities, which included undertaking case studies and convening an expert meeting, and the outcomes of discussions on the use of MRA in microbiological risk management. In particular, it addresses the progress made and the challenges being faced in elaborating practical guidance on the use of MRA outputs to develop practical risk management strategies. It should be noted that the meeting was only able to begin the process of developing practical guidance in this area. The participants (a) summarized the current state of play, (b) used case studies prepared in advance of the meeting to identify the technical areas where guidance is needed (c) identified priority issues which will need further discussion and elaboration in order to provide the practical guidance requested by the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene and required by FAO and WHO member countries. Thus, this report should be considered a step in the continuing international process to establish a sound technical basis for adopting a risk analysis approach to microbiological food safety concerns. The role of MRA in food safety risk management is varied and the way in which an MRA is developed should directly relate to the needs of risk managers, as far as possible according to data or resource limitations. Taking this into consideration the meeting sought to outline the range of potential applications of MRA in risk management including its role in the development of quantitative risk-based microbiological targets or metrics 1, the selection and evaluation of control measures, the articulation of levels of control expected of food safety systems in a manner consistent with the goals of the Codex Alimentarius and the World Trade Organization and the verification of compliance. Recently there has been particular focus on the use of MRA to establish and/or implement quantitative risk-based microbiological targets or metrics such as Food Safety Objectives (FSOs), Performance Objectives (POs), and Performance Criteria (PCs), that are intended to relate public health goals with the degree of stringency required of food safety systems and control measures to achieve these goals. While these targets have been defined by Codex there is little experience to date regarding their establishment or implementation. The 1 See section 1.2 "Terminology". - ix -

11 meeting considered FSO, PO and PC to be intermediate targets 2, given that they provide the means to link actual control measures to public health outcomes. While it is considered that MRA has a critical role in their establishment and implementation, the means by which MRA can be used to achieve this was an important area of discussion of the meeting. It was noted that while an FSO may be used as a metric for translating control measures into public health outcomes, PO and PC are more likely to be the metrics used for establishing the stringency of a food safety system. An important reason for this is that PO and PC can be utilised at points in the food supply chain where control measures can be implemented and verified, through the implementation of appropriate microbiological criteria, processing criteria and product criteria. An important consideration was the type of MRA that could be used to establish such quantitative targets. Quantitative MRA can be deterministic or probabilistic. While deterministic risk assessment, being based on single value inputs and outputs provides a relatively straightforward means of using MRA to develop such targets, this comes at a cost in terms of accuracy, limited insights into uncertainty and a tendency to focus on extreme situations, e.g. worst-case scenarios. Probabilistic risk assessment provides the means to overcome these disadvantages and in principle offers the best opportunity for operationalizing intermediate targets. However, considering that the inputs and outputs of the probabilistic approach is a distribution of values, this poses a significant challenge in terms of how to express the outcome as a target to be achieved by appropriate control measures and for taking decisions that are consistent with the legal systems of various countries. One of the advantages of a properly designed deterministic model is the ability to move forwards and backwards in the model to, for example, determine possible values for a PO and to select the best points in the chain for POs. The more complex nature of probabilistic risk assessments makes it is more complicated to back calculate starting at the FSO or a PO to determine the value of a PO earlier in the food chain. The meeting provided general guidance on how this and other difficulties could be avoided, and identified several other technical issues that need to be considered to successfully develop guidance to countries and others who want to take advantages of the strengths of these decision tools. Substantial discussion was devoted to whether the current definitions of FSO, PO and PC are fully compatible with what is currently accepted as the outputs of probabilistic risk assessment. This revolved around the definitions use of maximum. Some experts felt that this was inconsistent with the distributions involved with probabilistic risk assessments whereas others were of the opinion that the definitions were currently flexible enough to allow maximum to be operationally defined. Further discussions are needed to consider how this discrepancy could be resolved. A well designed risk assessment provides the means to evaluate and compare the effects of different control measures on public health risk to consumers (i.e., risk per servings) or risk to a country (i.e., risk per annum) on an industry wide basis. This direct application of MRA has been demonstrated by a number of risk assessments at both national and international level and is widely recognized as one of the strengths of MRA.. However, despite its well recognized utility, this approach may be restrictive, particularly when applied to foods where there is diversity in the way these foods are manufactured and where there are 2 See section 1.2 "Terminology". - x -

12 multiple approaches to managing risks. In such cases the establishment of intermediate targets may be more desirable and practical. Risk management does not end with the selection of appropriate control measures. It must be followed up with monitoring activities to determine the level of compliance. The effectiveness of a particular control measure can be highly influenced by the level of compliance with that measure. Too high a level of stringency may reduce the level of compliance, whereas a very high degree of compliance may be achieved with something slightly less stringent. MRA allows consideration and comparison of such scenarios to facilitate the selection of the most appropriate risk management option. - xi -

13

14 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Food safety risk management can be described in general terms as the process of weighing control alternatives by government (and international standard-setting bodies) in consultation with interested stakeholders, taking into account scientific information on risks to consumers as well as other relevant inputs (e.g. economics, technical feasibility, societal preferences), and choosing and implementing food safety measures as appropriate. During the course of the past ten years, FAO, WHO, the Codex Alimentarius Commission and individual countries have made significant progress in the development of a generic Risk Management Framework (RMF). This framework identifies the different activities that need to be conducted in a structured, ongoing and iterative manner to manage food safety risks. It is a systematic process that uses the results of MRA and other scientific evaluations to develop effective risk management options for implementation at appropriate steps along the food chain. Previous meetings in Kiel, Germany focussed upon the interaction between assessors and managers of microbiological hazards (2000) and incorporation of microbiological risk assessment in the development of food safety standards (2002). In 2005 FAO/WHO reported to the 37 th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH) their plans to undertake work on Development of Practical Risk Management Strategies Based on Microbiological Risk Assessment Outputs. In order to ensure that such work provided information that would be of use to Codex, FAO/WHO asked CCFH to identify specific areas of interest. In response CCFH highlighted their needs in this area through the development of a Discussion Paper on the Needs of CCFH for the Provision of Scientific Advice by FAO/WHO on the Application of Risk Assessment to Risk Management (Annex I). During application of a risk management framework, different types of risk management options can be considered. In support of this and building on the work of a number of countries that have developed national risk assessments, FAO and WHO have jointly developed a range of microbiological risk assessments in response to specific requests from the CCFH. While answering risk management questions posed by CCFH, they have also evolved into comprehensive resource documents on the food safety problems of concern, as well as on risk assessment methodology itself. Over the last two years there has been particular focus at the international level on the use of MRA to establish and/or implement quantitative risk-based microbiological targets (or metrics) such as Food Safety Objectives (FSOs), Performance Objectives (POs), and Performance Criteria (PCs), that are intended to relate public health goals with the degree of stringency required of food safety measures and systems to achieve these goals. In this context, such targets potentially play an important role in food safety risk management by articulating the level of control of identified risks needed to achieve the desired level of public health protection. They can also serve as a basis to more scientifically establish traditional operational control measures, for example microbiological criteria or process criteria that are employed to establish the level of control required and verifying that that level of control is achieved

15 1.2 Terminology used in the report The terminology that is used in relation to food safety risk management is extensive and varied. Some of the terms used in the context of this report and their intended meaning are: Control measure: any action or activity that can be used to prevent or eliminate a food safety hazard or reduce it to an acceptable level. 3 Risk management option: the risk manager may have available to him/her a range of potential actions or interventions, in other words options, that could potentially be implemented. It is the role of the risk manager to ensure that such options are identified and the acceptable one(s) selected for subsequent implementation. In doing this, risk managers need to consider the suitability of the potential risk management options to reduce the risk posed by a food safety issue to an acceptable level. 4 Metrics: quantitative expressions that indicate a level of control at a specific step in a food safety risk management system. For the purpose of this report the term metric is used as a collective for the new risk management terms of food safety objective, performance objective and performance criteria, but it also refers to existing microbiological criteria. 5 Intermediate targets: for the purposes of this document FSO, PO and PC are considered to be and referred to as intermediate targets. 1.3 Overview of microbiological risk management The microbiological risk management (MRM) process is described by Codex in their draft principles and guidelines for the conduct of MRM (see Annex VI) and a diagramatic overview of the process is presented in Figure 1, below. The ultimate aim of any MRM process is the availability of safe food and improved levels of consumer protection. Risk managers are responsible for choosing and implementing food safety control measures, taking into account available scientific information. Within this process, risk managers may undertake different tasks ranging from the establishment of public health goals, articulating the appropriate levels of protection, enforcing control measures, evaluating or verifying the performance of their management decisions to ensuring the country meets its obligations under the SPS Agreement. For risk managers to make informed decisions, it is critical they understand whether a risk management program will deliver an expected public health outcome. This is particularly relevant when attempting to determine the economic consequences of a risk management approach or the equivalence of approaches. The ability to use a risk assessment to directly consider the impact of different risk mitigation strategies on the public health outcome is a powerful tool. 3 See Codex Alimentarius Food Hygiene Basic Texts, Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point System (HACCP) and Guidelines for its Application, Defintions. Available at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/publications/booklets/hygiene/foodhygiene_2003e.pdf. 4 Proposed Draft Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Management at Step 5; 6.1 Identification of the available MRM options for Codex (ALINORM 05/28/13, Appendix III). 5 See Codex Alimentarius Food Hygiene Basic Texts, Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods, 1. Definition of microbiological criteria (CAC/GL ). Available at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/publications/booklets/hygiene/foodhygiene_2003e.pdf

16 In recent years risk-based approaches, based on the best available scientific information, have been recognized as a means of enhancing the ability of food safety risk management to meet its primary goal of protecting public health, as well as assuring access to an adequate food supply and facilitating trade. Such an approach implies that actions, regulations, guidelines, and standards are constructed and formulated according to specific knowledge of risks to life and health, thus, the practicalities of implementation of a risk-based standard introduce new challenges. Risk-based management actions that are aimed at achieving a level of health protection which can be explained and validated in terms of risk to human health may be expressed in terms of a public health goal, the appropriate level of protection (ALOP) currently achieved or other relevant term. Public health goals are set, usually by governments or public health bodies, to inspire action to improve the public health status and reduce disease burden. Setting such goals, which can range from the general to the specific, requires consideration of the current health status and disease burden as well as feasibility in terms of how to achieve the goals and measure the degree of achievement. Public health status is a measure of the current health situation in the population and can also be expressed in general or specific terms. This may be used as a basis from which to establish future public health goals or as a measure of the effectiveness of risk management actions. A particular expression of the current public health status is the Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP), which originated from the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. In contrast to a public health goal, an ALOP is an expression of the level of protection in relation to food safety that is currently achieved. It is not an expression of a future or desirable level of protection. Risk management which focuses on food safety systems achieving a specified level of performance can promote public health and international trade, while still allowing for innovation and different approaches for meeting that desired level of protection. As the application of such approaches becomes more widespread, the adoption of risk-based management systems by countries becomes more critical for trade. While WTO promotes the harmonization of international standards and Codex develops the relevant food safety standards, a country may in some cases need to exceed the international standard. In order to execute this right a justification is required, which can be validly provided through the implementation of risk management actions based on risk assessment Food safety management in practice As food safety management approaches have evolved there has been a move towards a whole food chain approach. This recognizes the many contributors to ensuring food safety all along the food chain. But importantly from a management perspective it highlights the need for collaboration of different institutions and ministries at national or government level. Food safety is no longer the responsibility of a single ministry such as those responsible for agriculture or health. Successful food safety management recognizes the importance of collaboration between the relevant sectors and well designed risk-based management systems provide the mechanism for such collaboration

17 - 4 - Preliminary risk management activities Initiation of the data gathering process Presentation of Identification of a microbiological food safety issue Commission of a risk profile Evaluating the result of the risk profile Recommendation for further actions Risk assessment policy Mandate for risk assessors Risk assessment NO ACTION Immediate public health concern Immediate and/or [provisional] decision Identification and selection of MRM options Evaluating the result of the MRA Implementationion of MRM options Monitoring and review of MRM Figure 1: Diagrammatic overview of the microbiological risk management framework (from the Draft Codex Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Management).

18 Sometimes these provisions relate to one specific step but more often they reflect the integrated control measures of all steps prior to a specific site in the food chain. The level of control at a designated step in the food chain must be sufficient to take account of the likely dynamics of the hazard in subsequent steps. The provisions for hazard control may be collectively referred to as the food safety management system. Food safety management systems exert their control through the control measures that are put in place. The stringency of these control measures will determine the overall level of control that will be achieved by a food safety system. The selection of control measures for a step depends on the food to be produced, what effects previous and subsequent steps in the food chain have on the level of the hazard, technologies available, and many other aspects. The selection should also take into account the level of control over a hazard that is required at the particular step. This is often referred to as the required stringency. Whether this stringency is achieved will depend on the proper implementation and performance of the control measures. Therefore, along food supply chains, control measures are implemented within systematic management systems such as Good Hygiene Practices (GHP) and a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system, which help assure the selection, systematic implementation and monitoring of valid control measures. It is the performance of the food safety management system, both in terms of the stringency that it is designed to achieve and the degree to which that system is consistently implemented, that determines the extent of control achieved over a hazard and thus the risk associated with the final food product. The hazard level at consumption is a primary determinant of risk to the consumer, either on a population level or a per serving level. The risk to public health can be quantified based on knowledge of the relationship between the dose of the hazard and its impact on the consumer s health Using MRA in the selection/evaluation of intermediate targets The expected stringency of measures implemented to achieve the desired level of control in a food safety system can be communicated in different ways, for example the stipulation of manufacturing requirements through the use of process criteria or product testing (e.g., microbiological criteria). The use of such measures involves the establishment of an implicit or explicit limit to the hazard level and/or frequency at a specific point. The establishment of limits provides distinct advantages to both risk managers and the food industry, by clearly articulating the level of control expected. When done on an industry wide basis, this establishes a level playing field among companies in the industry. If done with a focus on the level of control required, rather than on a specific technology or practice, such limits provide enhanced flexibility as to the approaches and technologies used to achieve the required level of control. Such limits have been traditionally established through expert advice and related to a certain level of stringency at a specific step in or at the end of the food chain that was considered to be adequate. However, within a risk-based food safety management system it is possible to more transparently and objectively relate the establishment of such limits to the intended public health outcome. In the draft guidance provided by Codex on such a system (Annex VI), it is proposed to use the terms FSO, PO and PC to communicate the limits required at specific points in food supply chains in an explicit way to the affected food industry

19 1.4 Recent activities at the international level Recognizing the need to establish practical guidance, FAO and WHO, in late 2004 prepared a concept paper to define their future program of work on the Development of Practical Risk Management Strategies Based on Microbiological Risk Assessment Outputs (Annex II). At that time a call for experts was also issued in order to identify potential contributors to this activity. As part of the planning process this paper was made available to the 37 th session of the CCFH (March 2005, Buenos Aires). In response the committee prepared a discussion paper on this issue requesting that FAO/WHO more explicitly focus future work on the development of practical guidance on how to establish FSOs and microbiological criteria derived thereof, on the basis of risk assessment outputs (see Annex I, p.36). Taking into account the areas for consideration identified by Codex the objective of the FAO/WHO work was defined as: The elaboration of guidelines for the use of the outputs of qualitative and quantitative microbiological risk assessments in developing or determining practical strategies and risk management standards for microbiological hazards in foods. In order to achieve this, a range of issues were considered. These included identification of: The difficulties or barriers that have been encountered to date in developing practical MRM guidance based on the outputs of MRA and associated or relevant scientific information. What is missing? What can be done to overcome these barriers? The types of risk management decisions/actions that would benefit from the inclusion of a MRA in combination with other scientific and technological information. The lack of practical guidance on how MRA can be used to enhance MRM activities related to the development of Codes of Hygienic Practice or the setting of critical limits in HACCP systems for control measures at primary production, processing, and marketing levels. The availability of techniques for modifying a MRA developed at a national and international level so that it is valid for use by another country or risk management system. The need to be able to account for regional, cultural and geographical differences in risk management approaches across the world. MRA s may be qualitative or quantitative in nature so it is necessary to consider how the type of MRA will impact the way it is used in risk management. The technical, economic, educational, and data limitations that would hamper the development of a MRA and its application to risk management processes. Considering the wide range of issues to be addressed it became clear that a stepwise approach was warranted. The first step taken was to establish seven working groups to begin addressing the various issues identified above. While one group focussed on the overarching issues and identifying the difficulties faced and the perceived drawbacks of using MRA in risk management, each of the other groups undertook a case study to evaluate the application of MRA in risk management with particular focus on the establishment of targets. Each working group used a different pathogen/product MRA. The six case studies were: - 6 -

20 Staphylococcus aureus in cheese Escherichia coli O157:H7 in meat Vibrio vulnificus in oysters Listeria monocytogenes in smoked fish Salmonella Enteritidis in eggs Campylobacter jejuni in broiler chickens Each working group documented its experience in terms of the process it went through to address its task. Based on the assumption that a specific risk management system is being established or already in place, some of the tasks of the case study working groups were as follows: Develop an approach for establishing a FSO and any related relevant metrics based upon the results of the MRA and consider how an FSO and related criteria be integrated into traditional food safety management tools such as HACCP and GHP s? Consider how to use MRA and other available scientific information to evaluate the efficacy of specific risk management measures including assessing the equivalence of different risk management options. Consider what metrics associated with a specific risk management measure could be used to monitor the overall performance of the system and/or specific measure and are necessary for the review its efficacy. As indicated by the above list the development of guidance on the use of MRA is far from straightforward and while it appears to be possible in some cases it is not necessarily very simple or clear-cut. A list of the working group members is provided in Annex III and the key findings of the case studies are provided in Annex IV. The complete background papers will be made available on the FAO and WHO websites. The second step was to use these case studies and framework document, together with other relevant documentation such as the draft Codex texts on MRM (see Annex VI), as the basis for the discussions at an expert meeting, and to contribute to the ultimate objective of developing practical guidance with a focus on the establishment of microbiological targets for risk management of microbiological hazards in foods. 1.5 Overview of expert meeting The expert meeting was held in Kiel, Germany from 3-7 April 2006, and was hosted by the Federal Research Centre for Nutrition and Food in collaboration with the German Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection. The meeting was opened by Dr Andrea Sanwidi (Federal Ministry of Food Agriculture and Consumer Protection). A total of 23 experts from 15 countries participated in the meeting (Annex V). Participants elected Mr Alan Reilly as chairperson of the consultation and Dr Judith Hilton as rapporteur. The framework document and case studies were made available to all participants in advance of the meeting, and overviews were presented at the commencement of the meeting in order to facilitate discussion. In addition, the FAO/WHO secretariat presented an - 7 -

Food Safety Risk Analysis PART I An Overview and Framework Manual Provisional Edition FAO Rome, June 2005 The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect

FAO FOOD AND NUTRITION PAPER NUMBER 65 RISK MANAGEMENT AND FOOD SAFETY Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation Rome, Italy, 27 to 31 January 1997 ISSUED BY THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED

ISPM 7 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES ISPM 7 PHYTOSANITARY CERTIFICATION SYSTEM (2011) Produced by the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention FAO 2011 ISPM 7 Phytosanitary

GUIDELINES FOR FOOD IMPORT CONTROL SYSTEMS SECTION 1 SCOPE CAC/GL 47-2003 1. This document provides a framework for the development and operation of an import control system to protect consumers and facilitate

TEXTUAL PROPOSAL SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES (SPS) Article 1 Scope and coverage This Chapter applies to all SPS measures that may, directly or indirectly, affect trade between the Parties. This

New Zealand s Food Safety Risk Management Framework T e P o u O r a n g a K a i o A o t e a r o a Important Disclaimer Every effort has been made to ensure the information in this report is accurate. NZFSA

CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SCIENCE COUNCIL Report of the External Review of the Systemwide Program on Alternatives to Slash and Burn (ASB) SCIENCE COUNCIL SECRETARIAT JUNE

THAI AGRICULTURAL STANDARD TAS 9010-2006 PRINCIPLES FOR THE RISK ANALYSIS OF FOODS DERIVED FROM MODERN BIOTECHNOLOGY National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards Ministry of Agriculture

Principles and Guidelines on Confidentiality Aspects of Data Integration Undertaken for Statistical or Related Research Purposes These Principles and Guidelines were endorsed by the Conference of European

January 2013 RESTRICTED PROPOSED UPDATED TEXT FOR WHO GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES FOR PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS: MAIN PRINCIPLES (JANUARY 2013) DRAFT FOR COMMENTS Please address any comments on this proposal

CONCEPTS OF FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Mrs. Malini Rajendran Brief background 1963 - The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created by FAO and WHO to develop food standards, guidelines and

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan Cap-Net International Network for Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management November 2009 The purpose of this document is to improve learning from the Cap-Net

QUALITY AGENCY REGULATOR PERFORMANCE As part of its commitment to reduce unnecessary and inefficient regulation the Australian Government commenced a Regulator Performance Framework from 1 July 2015. The

REFLECTING ON EXPERIENCES OF THE TEACHER INDUCTION SCHEME September 2005 Myra A Pearson, Depute Registrar (Education) Dr Dean Robson, Professional Officer First Published 2005 The General Teaching Council

VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES ON THE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE At a glance VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES ON THE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE At a glance FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2012 The designations

Import Risk Analysis Handbook Canberra, 2003 Commonwealth of Australia 2003 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice)

National Health Research Policy The establishment of a Department of Health Research (DHR) in the Ministry of Health is recognition by the GOI of the key role that health research should play in the nation.

RKI workshop, Evidence based immunisation Evidence-based methods for public health ECDC report Evidence-based methods for public health How to assess the best available evidence when time is limited and

A Risk Management Standard Introduction This Risk Management Standard is the result of work by a team drawn from the major risk management organisations in the UK, including the Institute of Risk management

Page 117 AGREEMENT ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE Members, Having regard to the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations; Desiring to further the objectives of GATT 1994; Recognizing the important

14 Water safety plan review, approval and audit An appropriate body, usually the regulator or their designated agents, should review and approve water safety plans prepared by suppliers or Government agencies.

MPH Epidemiology Following are detailed competencies which are addressed to various extents in coursework, field training and the integrative project. Biostatistics Describe the roles biostatistics serves

Guide for Documenting and Sharing Best Practices in Health Programmes Guide for Documenting and Sharing Best Practices in Health Programmes WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION Regional Office for Africa Brazzaville

Meta-analysis of Reviews and Evaluation of Ecoregional Programs Julio A. Berdegué and Germán Escobar 1. Aim, method and organization of the analysis The aim of this report is to summarize the main lessons

Part Two Part Two: the indicator development process the indicator development process Part Two: the indicator development process Key elements of the indicator development process Define strategic directions

MPH COMPETENCIES The MPH competencies are based on those approved by the Association of Schools of Public Health (ASPH) in 2006. By graduation, all MPH students must demonstrate the ability to apply public

Checklist for Operational Risk Management I. Development and Establishment of Comprehensive Operational Risk Management System by Management Checkpoints - Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting

Guidelines for Animal Disease Control 1. Introduction and objectives The guidelines are intended to help countries identify priorities, objectives and the desired goal of disease control programmes. Disease

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE PARIS, 1991 DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance Development Assistance Committee Abstract: The following

FOREWORD In recent years there has been a growing awareness of the potential for accidents involving radiation sources, some such accidents having had serious, even fatal, consequences. More recently still,

II. Figure 5: 6 The project cycle can be explained in terms of five phases: identification, preparation and formulation, review and approval, implementation, and evaluation. Distinctions among these phases,

STAGE 1 STANDARD FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ROLE DESCRIPTION - THE MATURE, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER The following characterises the senior practice role that the mature, Professional Engineer may be expected

Exposure Draft May 2014 Comments due: September 11, 2014 Proposed Changes to the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) Addressing Disclosures in the Audit of Financial Statements This Exposure Draft

Standard No. 13 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE SUPERVISORS STANDARD ON ASSET-LIABILITY MANAGEMENT OCTOBER 2006 This document was prepared by the Solvency and Actuarial Issues Subcommittee in consultation

2011/SOM1/EC/WKSP2/005 Session 2 Setting the APEC Context for Using RIA Submitted by: United States Workshop on Using Regulatory Impact Analysis to Improve Transparency and Effectiveness in the Rulemaking

Performance, vision and strategy (PVS) Eric Bolaños Ledezma Ana Marisa Cordero Peña Interaction within the public sector and with the private sector Capacity to access international markets Human and financial

A F O F I A T IS PA N The group enterprise book A practical guide for Group Promoters to assist groups in setting up and running successful small enterprises Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

EUROPEAN COMMISSION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT Implementation of procedures based on the HACCP principles, and facilitation of the implementation of the HACCP principles in certain food businesses EUROPEAN COMMISSION

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT RESOURCE CENTRE PARC Evaluation Series No.1 The Logical Framework By w PARC Evaluation Series No. 1: The Logical Framework Looking back over the last year and the conferences where

Strengthening national food control systems A quick guide to assess capacity building needs Strengthening national food control systems A quick guide to assess capacity building needs FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 1 to 24 (2005 edition) INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES 1 to 24 (2005 edition) Produced by the Secretariat of the International Plant

Annex DRAFT Guidance Document on the Planning and Implementation of Joint Reviews of Pesticides Revision 8 September 2010 Table of Contents SECTION 1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF THE JOINT REVIEW PROCESS...

FINANCIAL SERVICES TRAINING PACKAGE FNB99 This is Volume 12 of a 13-volume set. This volume should not be used in isolation but in the context of the complete set for the Financial Services Training Package.

6. Quality assurance Risk characterization not only synthesizes the results of the previous parts of the risk assessment but also summarizes the overall findings and presents the strengths and limitations

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Strasbourg, 19.5.2015 COM(2015) 216 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation

EUROPEAN COMMISSION AGRICULTURE DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Guidelines for the mid term evaluation of rural development programmes 2000-2006 supported from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund